4 ms·

I've been following this debate for years. I constantly see people arguing against this position that "nope, no greenhouse gases, no global warming". Yet I hav

I've been following this debate for years. I constantly see people arguing against this position that "nope, no greenhouse gases, no global warming". Yet I have never, not once, not ever seen this point expressed by any person of significance. Every single time, it turns out to be a strawman constructed by taking statements out of context, or applying dumb overly-literal interpretations to someone's words. Always. If someone could point to any example ever of any significant person stating that the climate is not changing whatsoever, or that humans cannot possibly affect climate in the slightest, I'd be very interested. Not taking two words out of context - I mean someone who clearly means that and sticks to that message. Does such a person exist anywhere today? What is his or her name?

SolaceQuantum 8y ago
“If someone could point to any example ever of any significant person stating that the climate is not changing whatsoever, or that humans cannot possibly affect climate in the slightest, ” This is Marco Rubio, US senator, who claims global warming is not caused by humans. ““I don’t agree with the notion that some are putting out there, including scientists, that somehow there are actions we can take today that would actually have an impact on what’s happening in our climate,” Rubio said in an interview that aired Sunday on ABC’s This Week. “Our climate is always changing.”” - http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/marco-rubio-global-warming http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/marco-rubio-global-warming Roger Wicker, US senator voted No on an amendment to confirm Climate Change is real. http://time.com/3677496/climate-change-wicker-inhofe/ http://time.com/3677496/climate-change-wicker-inhofe/ There’s a list of senators who voted against that climate change is caused by humans: https://www.aip.org/fyi/2015/record-key-senate-vote-climate-change https://www.aip.org/fyi/2015/record-key-senate-vote-climate-... The POTUS has stated multiple times that climate change is a hoax, and has only recently amended that he believes its naturally occurring (not human influenced) https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-global-warming-hoax/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-global-warmin... Even with the demand for proof of someone that absolutely denies climate change, you leave in two difficult phrases here: “significant” and “in the slightest”. Both of these give you a rhetorical out on technical merits- anyone who denies climate change will do so using FUD techniques, not outright stating their denial, therefore it’s easy to say no one uses obvious language. The effect however is still the same- politicians and significant figures are spreading FUD about climate change, which is causing climate change and human caused climate change to be called into public question and it prevents legislation being passed to regulate emissions.
- jlawson 8y ago
  Yep, none of these satisfy and it's obvious if you take them seriously and not literally, and put them in context. >"I don’t agree with the notion that some are putting out there, including scientists, that somehow there are actions we can take today that would actually have an impact on what’s happening in our climate," A serious reading would indicate Rubio is saying the US doesn't have policy levers to solve the problem - not that humans cannot ever have any effect on climate. >Roger Wicker, US senator voted No on an amendment to confirm Climate Change is real Interesting that he was the only senator to vote no, including Marco Rubio above. Does this give you any pause about your first example? Since you know, you just contradicted yourself right there with your own evidence. Regarding Wicker himself, his position is "scientific data on rising global temperatures is not conclusive" which is not the same as "humans can't affect climate". >There’s a list of senators who voted against that climate change is caused by humans Again, you are lying. They didn't vote against climate change being caused by humans to any degree. They voted against "human activity significantly contributes to climate change" which is a much stronger statement. Again the pattern: Take any nuanced position and misquote it as saying the climate can't possibly change because of people, and then say how ridiculous it is. It is ridiculous, which is why nobody says that. Regarding Trump, he did use the word "hoax", but that doesn't mean he thinks the climate never can change at all or that humans can't possibly affect it. Look at what he actually meant. Snopes is a radically biased source so not useful in this discussion. Regarding your last paragraph, you are simply moving the goalposts. You changed it from "they deny the climate changes" to "they are politicking to avoid my preferred policies". Nobody would deny that people obfuscate and double-talk in politics. That's not the question at hand. My position stands.

SolaceQuantum 8y ago

“If someone could point to any example ever of any significant person stating that the climate is not changing whatsoever, or that humans cannot possibly affect climate in the slightest, ” This is Marco Rubio, US senator, who claims global warming is not caused by humans. ““I don’t agree with the notion that some are putting out there, including scientists, that somehow there are actions we can take today that would actually have an impact on what’s happening in our climate,” Rubio said in an interview that aired Sunday on ABC’s This Week. “Our climate is always changing.”” - http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/marco-rubio-global-warming http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/marco-rubio-global-warming Roger Wicker, US senator voted No on an amendment to confirm Climate Change is real. http://time.com/3677496/climate-change-wicker-inhofe/ http://time.com/3677496/climate-change-wicker-inhofe/ There’s a list of senators who voted against that climate change is caused by humans: https://www.aip.org/fyi/2015/record-key-senate-vote-climate-change https://www.aip.org/fyi/2015/record-key-senate-vote-climate-... The POTUS has stated multiple times that climate change is a hoax, and has only recently amended that he believes its naturally occurring (not human influenced) https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-global-warming-hoax/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donald-trump-global-warmin... Even with the demand for proof of someone that absolutely denies climate change, you leave in two difficult phrases here: “significant” and “in the slightest”. Both of these give you a rhetorical out on technical merits- anyone who denies climate change will do so using FUD techniques, not outright stating their denial, therefore it’s easy to say no one uses obvious language. The effect however is still the same- politicians and significant figures are spreading FUD about climate change, which is causing climate change and human caused climate change to be called into public question and it prevents legislation being passed to regulate emissions.

jlawson 8y ago
Yep, none of these satisfy and it's obvious if you take them seriously and not literally, and put them in context. >"I don’t agree with the notion that some are putting out there, including scientists, that somehow there are actions we can take today that would actually have an impact on what’s happening in our climate," A serious reading would indicate Rubio is saying the US doesn't have policy levers to solve the problem - not that humans cannot ever have any effect on climate. >Roger Wicker, US senator voted No on an amendment to confirm Climate Change is real Interesting that he was the only senator to vote no, including Marco Rubio above. Does this give you any pause about your first example? Since you know, you just contradicted yourself right there with your own evidence. Regarding Wicker himself, his position is "scientific data on rising global temperatures is not conclusive" which is not the same as "humans can't affect climate". >There’s a list of senators who voted against that climate change is caused by humans Again, you are lying. They didn't vote against climate change being caused by humans to any degree. They voted against "human activity significantly contributes to climate change" which is a much stronger statement. Again the pattern: Take any nuanced position and misquote it as saying the climate can't possibly change because of people, and then say how ridiculous it is. It is ridiculous, which is why nobody says that. Regarding Trump, he did use the word "hoax", but that doesn't mean he thinks the climate never can change at all or that humans can't possibly affect it. Look at what he actually meant. Snopes is a radically biased source so not useful in this discussion. Regarding your last paragraph, you are simply moving the goalposts. You changed it from "they deny the climate changes" to "they are politicking to avoid my preferred policies". Nobody would deny that people obfuscate and double-talk in politics. That's not the question at hand. My position stands.